Reading research and the un common core a blueprint for teaching and teacher education
Download
1 / 122

Reading Research and the UN-Common Core: A Blueprint for Teaching and Teacher Education? - PowerPoint PPT Presentation


  • 156 Views
  • Uploaded on

Reading Research and the UN-Common Core: A Blueprint for Teaching and Teacher Education?. P. David Pearson University of California, Berkeley. Link to slides will be posted at http://www.scienceandliteracy.org/research/pdavidpearson. Goals for Today.

loader
I am the owner, or an agent authorized to act on behalf of the owner, of the copyrighted work described.
capcha
Download Presentation

PowerPoint Slideshow about ' Reading Research and the UN-Common Core: A Blueprint for Teaching and Teacher Education?' - amadis


An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation

Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author.While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server.


- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - E N D - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Presentation Transcript
Reading research and the un common core a blueprint for teaching and teacher education

Reading Research and the UN-Common Core: A Blueprint for Teaching and Teacher Education?

P. David Pearson

University of California, Berkeley

Link to slides will be posted at http://www.scienceandliteracy.org/research/pdavidpearson


Goals for today
Goals for Teaching and Teacher Education?Today

  • Remind ourselves of what the Standards are designed to do.

  • Examine their potential

    • New possibilities: The high road on curriculum, text, and cognitive challenge

    • Explore their dark side: Beware the pot holes, sink holes, and black holes

  • Discuss some defensible positions to take on curriculum, pedagogy, and teacher education as we move into the all important implementation phase

Link to slides will be posted at http://www.scienceandliteracy.org/research/pdavidpearson


What i could but will not talk about
What I could, but will NOT talk about… Teaching and Teacher Education?

  • Assessment: Lots to say

    • déjà vu all over again

  • Scope and Sequence of Standards

    • What could and should change over time

    • What should remain the same


Survey
Survey Teaching and Teacher Education?

  • Elementary?

  • Secondary?

  • College?

  • What’s the difference

http://www.scienceandliteracy.org/research/pdavidpearson


Elementary teachers love
Elementary Teachers Love Teaching and Teacher Education?

  • Their kids


Secondary teachers love
Secondary Teachers Love Teaching and Teacher Education?

  • Their subjects


College teachers love
College Teachers Love Teaching and Teacher Education?

  • Themselves


A confession my relationship with the standards movements
A Confession: Teaching and Teacher Education?My Relationship with the Standards Movements

  • Member of the Validation Committee of the CCSS

  • Background work on text complexity with a grant from Gates Foundation

  • Long (and occasionally checkered) history with standards going back to

    • NBPTS: Standards for Teacher Certification

    • IRA/NCTE Standards for English Language Arts

  • Research and development work on assessment, especially the sorts of assessments that are privileged by deeper learning


What sold me on the standards both ccss and teks ccrs
What sold me on the Teaching and Teacher Education?standards, both CCSS and TEKS/CCRS


What the ccss said about reading
What Teaching and Teacher Education?the CCSS said about reading

  • Students who meet the Standards readily undertake the close, attentive, reading that is at the heart of understanding and enjoying complex works of literature. They habitually perform the critical reading necessary to pick carefully through the staggering amount of information available today in print and digitally. They actively seek the wide, deep, and thoughtful engagement with high-quality literary and informational texts that builds knowledge, enlarges experience, and broadens world views. They reflexively demonstrate the cogent reasoning and use of evidence essential to both private deliberation and responsible citizenship in a democratic republic. (CCSSO/NGA, 2010, p. 3)


Or from the ccrs
Or from the CCRS… Teaching and Teacher Education?

  • Academic and business leaders emphasize the importance of being able to apply these skills across a variety of contexts and subject matter. They describe 21st century learning and work environments in which the cross-disciplinary skills are prerequisites to solving many of the most important problems students will encounter in college and the workplace. These problems increasingly require applying knowledge across disciplines and subject areas and the mastery of a base set of communication and analysis skills that span subject areas. Students, then, not only need to possess content knowledge, but also need to be able to apply key cognitive skills to the academic tasks presented to them, most of which require much more than simple recall of factual knowledge. These cross-disciplinary standards enable students to engage in deeper levels of thinking across a wide range of subjects.


So what s not to like
So what’s not to Like? Teaching and Teacher Education?

  • Nothing

  • Everything I believe in about literacy learning


What they said about teacher choice from the ccss
What they said about teacher Teaching and Teacher Education?choice: From the CCSS…

  • By emphasizing required achievements, the Standards leave room for teachers, curriculum developers, and states to determine how those goals should be reached and what additional topics should be addressed. Thus, the Standards do not mandate such things as a particular writing process or the full range of metacognitive strategies that students may need to monitor and direct their thinking and learning. Teachers are thus free to provide students with whatever tools and knowledge their professional judgment and experience identify as most helpful for meeting the goals set out in the Standards. (CCSSO/NGA, 2010, p. 4).


What you said in the ccrs
What you said in the CCRS… Teaching and Teacher Education?

  • In delineating the knowledge and skills necessary for college and career readiness, the CCRS do not specify the performance levels necessary to demonstrate competence. Without examples of course syllabi, assignments, and student work to illustrate when or how a standard is met, some standards could conceivably be interpreted to be at a level that would challenge graduate students. …

  • Examples of course material that illustrate the necessary performance level for each standard will be made available as the CCRS are implemented.


Just the right balance
Just the right balance Teaching and Teacher Education?

  • Let the body politic at every level have a voice in the big overarching goals

  • At every level along the way, from the state to the district to the school to the classroom, leave a little room for each player to place his or her “signature” on the effort…

  • Identity, buy-in, the right kind of political negotiation among levels within the system…



Why text complexity the gap for college and career readiness
Why text complexity? The gap for college and career readiness

Jack Stenner’s (lexile guy) depiction of the 200 lexile gap


C andidate approaches
C readinessandidate approaches

  • Up the ante on text complexity and tell folks (students and teachers) to try harder

  • Up the ante and RAMP UP the scaffolding and instruction needed to cope with the additional challenge

  • Engineer the increase within a web-delivered program…

  • We’ll talk about these later…


Another reason to support standards
Another reason to support standards… readiness

  • Hobson’s Choice…

  • Which is worse?

  • A single orthodoxy adhered to across the political entity?

  • OR

  • 1,000 or 10,000 or 100,000 local orthodoxies?


So……. readiness

  • In 2010, I signed on the dotted line to say the CCSS standards are worthy of our professional support and implementation

  • Ready to go on the road and seek converts.

  • But the road to paradise has been a little rocky…

  • By the way, no one has asked me to go on the road to sell the CCRS in Texas

  • Until today…


Today s agenda
Today’s Agenda readiness

  • Focus on a few important questions about standards…

    • What do they tell us about the level of challenge we need to provide in the texts students read?

      • Responsibility of readers and teachers…

    • What do they tell us about how students should be reading and understanding text?

      • Responsibility of readers and teachers…

    • What do they tell us about relationships of literacy to disciplinary learning—

      • what we are beginning to think of as disciplinary literacy?

  • Is there anything Texas can or should learn from the CCSS

  • Is there anything that the CCSS can or should learn from Texas?


Comprehension how we got to where we are
Comprehension: readinessHow we got to where we are…

  • The historical pathway to Kintsch’s Construction Integration Model and the RAND report


Rand readiness


Reader readiness

Text

Reading Comprehension

Context

Most models of reading have tried to explain how reader factors, text factors and context factors interact when readers make meaning.


Bottom up and New Criticism: Text-centric readiness

Reader

Text

Reading Comprehension

Context

The bottom up cognitive models of the 60s were very text centric, as was the “new criticism” model of literature from the 40s and 50s (I.A. Richards)


Pedagogy for Bottom up and New Criticism: Text-centric readiness

  • Since the meaning is in the text, we need to go dig it out…

  • Leads to Questions that

    • Interrogate the facts of the text

    • Get to the “right” interpretation

  • Writerly readings or textual readings


Reader readiness

Schema and Reader Response: Reader-centric

Text

Reading Comprehension

Context

The schema based cognitive models of the 70s and the reader response models (Rosenblatt) of the 80s focused more on reader factors--knowledge or interpretation mattered most


Pedagogy for Reader-centric readiness

  • Since the meaning is largely in the reader, we need to go dig it out…

  • Spend a lot of time on

    • Building background knowledge

    • Inferences needed to build a coherent model of meaning

    • Readers’ impressions, expressions, unbridled response

  • Readerly readings


A few clarifications of schema theory
A few clarifications of schema theory… readiness

  • Variation along a continuum of top-down vs bottom-up

    • Kohlers (1967): Reading is only incidentially textual

    • Anderson (1977): specific words/ideas instantiate general schemata: the text is the trigger to our knowledge stores

      • Not completely top down process


Critical literacy models: Context-centric readiness

Reader

Text

Reading Comprehension

Context

The sociocultural and critical literacy models of the 90s focused on the central role of context (purpose, situation, discourse community)


Pedagogy for Critical literacy models readiness

  • Since the meaning is largely in the context, we need to go dig it out…

  • Questions that get at the social, political and economic underbelly of the text

    • Whose interests are served by this text?

    • What is the author trying to get us to believe?

    • What features of the text contribute to a particular interpretation, e.g., that money is evil?


CI: Balance Reader and Text: little c for context readiness

Reader

Text

Reading Comprehension

Context

In Kintsch’smodel, Reader and Text factors are balanced, and context plays a“background”role--in purpose and motivation.


Pedagogical implications for CI readiness

  • Since the meaning is in this reader text interface, we need to go dig it out…

  • Query the accuracy of the text base.

    • What is going on in this part here where it says…

    • What does it mean when it says…

    • I was confused by this part…

  • Ascertain the situation model.

    • So what is going on here?

    • What do we know that we didn’t know before?


Kintchian model

Context readiness

Kintchian Model

Text

3

Knowledge Base

Does>>>>>>>>>

1

Text Base

2

Situation Model

Experience

Says

Means

Out in the world

Inside the head


New and different
New and different readiness

  • Most important: A new model of the comprehension process

    • Text (what the author left on the page)

    • Text base (the version a reader creates on a veridical reading)

    • Knowledge (what the reader brings from prior experience)

    • Model of meaning for a text

      • Dubbed the Situation Model (mental model)

      • A model that accounts for all the facts and resources available in the current situation


What s inside the knowledge box
What’s inside the Knowledge box? readiness

  • World knowledge (everyday stuff, including social and cultural norms)

  • Topical knowledge (dogs and canines)

  • Disciplinary knowledge (how history or astronomy works)

  • Linguistic knowledge

    • Phonology

    • Lexical and morphological

    • Syntax

    • Genre

    • Pragmatics (how language works in the world): Discourse, register, academic language, intention

    • Orthography (how print relates to speech)


How does a reader build a text base
How does a reader build a text base? readiness

Excerpt from Chapter 8 of Hatchet


“Some of the quills were driven in deeper than others and they tore when they came out. He breathed deeply twice, let half of the breath out, and went back to work. Jerk, pause, jerk — and three more times before he lay back in the darkness, done. The pain filled his leg now, and with it came new waves of self-pity. Sitting alone in the dark, his leg aching, some mosquitoes finding him again, he started crying. It was all too much, just too much, and he couldn’t take it. Not the way it was.


“I can’t take it this way, alone with no fire and in the dark, and next time it might be something worse, maybe a bear, and it wouldn’t be just quills in the leg, it would be worse. I can’t do this, he thought, again and again. I can’t. Brian pulled himself up until he was sitting upright back in the corner of the cave. He put his head down on his arms across his knees, with stiffness taking his left leg, and cried until he was cried out.”


Building a text base
Building a Text Base dark, and next time it might be something worse, maybe a bear, and it wouldn’t be just quills in the leg, it would be worse. I can’t do this, he thought, again and again

  • “Some of the quills were driven in (into what? His leg) deeper than others (other what? Quills) and they (the quills that were driven in deeper) tore when they (the deeper-in quills) came out (of his leg).He (Brian) breathed deeply twice, let half the breath out, and went back to work (work on what? Don’t know yet. Suspense. Expect to find out in next sentence). Jerk, pause, jerk (the work is jerking quills out)— and three more times (jerking quills out) he (Brian) lay back in the darkness, done (all the quills jerked out).


  • The pain filled his dark, and next time it might be something worse, maybe a bear, and it wouldn’t be just quills in the leg, it would be worse. I can’t do this, he thought, again and again(Brian’s) leg now, and with it (the pain) came new waves (what were the old waves?) of self-pity. (Brian) Sitting alone in the dark, his (Brian’s)leg aching, some mosquitoes finding him (Brian) again, he (Brian) started crying. It (the whole situation Brian was in) was all too much, just too much, and he (Brian) couldn’t take it(the situation).Not the way it (the situation)was. (What way was the situation? Don’t know yet. Suspense. Expect to find out in the next paragraph.)


  • “I dark, and next time it might be something worse, maybe a bear, and it wouldn’t be just quills in the leg, it would be worse. I can’t do this, he thought, again and again(Brian)can’t take it (the situation) this way (what way? Still don’t know. Suspense), alone with no fire and in the dark (now we know “this way” means “alone with no fire and in the dark”),and next time it (the next situation) might be something worse(than this situation),maybe a bear, and it(the problem that will define the situation)wouldn’t be just quills in the leg, it (the problem)would be worse (than quills in the leg).


  • I dark, and next time it might be something worse, maybe a bear, and it wouldn’t be just quills in the leg, it would be worse. I can’t do this, he thought, again and again(Brian)can’t do this (deal with the problem situation), he (Brian) thought, again and again. I (Brian) can’t “do this (deal with the problem situation).” Brian pulled himself (Brian)up until he (Brian) was sitting upright back in the corner of the cave. He (Brian)put his (Brian’s) head down on his (Brian’s) arms across his (Brian’s) knees, with stiffness taking his (Brian’s) left leg, and cried until he (Brian)was cried out.”


Some key moves in building a text base
Some key moves in building a text base… dark, and next time it might be something worse, maybe a bear, and it wouldn’t be just quills in the leg, it would be worse. I can’t do this, he thought, again and again

  • Processing words and attaching meaning to them

  • Using syntax to solidify key relations among ideas

    • Microstructure

    • Macrostructure

  • Resolving reference--things that stand for other things (mainly pronouns and nouns)

  • Using logical connectives (before, after, because, so, then, when, while, but) to figure out the relations among ideas

  • Inferring omitted connectives (e.g., figuring out that A is the cause of B) based on PK about the world

  • Posing questions for short term resolution

  • Identifying ambiguities for later resolution (wait and see)


So how about building a situation model
So how about building a situation model? dark, and next time it might be something worse, maybe a bear, and it wouldn’t be just quills in the leg, it would be worse. I can’t do this, he thought, again and again

  • The knowledge-comprehension relationship

  • We use our knowledge to build a situation model for a text

  • The information in the situation model is now available to become part of our long term memory and store of knowledge

  • To assist in processing the next bit.


Situation model for hatchet passage
Situation Model dark, and next time it might be something worse, maybe a bear, and it wouldn’t be just quills in the leg, it would be worse. I can’t do this, he thought, again and againfor Hatchet Passage

  • Integrate

    • Text base

    • Knowledge Base

  • We have the text base

  • What might be in the knowledge for a 10-year-old?


The blurb from the jacket of hatchet gives a preview of the book
The blurb from the jacket of dark, and next time it might be something worse, maybe a bear, and it wouldn’t be just quills in the leg, it would be worse. I can’t do this, he thought, again and againHatchet gives a preview of the book:

Thirteen-year old Brian Robeson is on his way to visit his father when the single engine plane in which he is flying crashes. Suddenly, Brian finds himself alone in the Canadian wilderness with nothing but his clothing, a tattered windbreaker and the hatchet his mother has given him as a present — and the dreadful secret that has been tearing him apart since his parents’ divorce. But now Brian has no time for anger, self-pity or despair — it will take all his know-how and determination, and more courage than he knew he possessed, to survive.


What a reader knows by chapter 8
What a reader knows by Chapter 8 dark, and next time it might be something worse, maybe a bear, and it wouldn’t be just quills in the leg, it would be worse. I can’t do this, he thought, again and again

Brian is stranded in the Canadian wilderness with a hatchet and his wits as his only tools for survival. He already has overcome several obstacles, including surviving the plane crash, building a small shelter and finding food.

In chapter eight, Brian awakens in the night to realize that there is an animal in his shelter. He throws his hatchet at the animal but misses. The hatchet makes sparks when it hits the wall of the cave. Brian then feels a pain in his leg. He sees the creature scuttle out of his shelter. Brian figures out that the animal was a porcupine because there are quills in his leg.


Some prior knowledge that a 5th grader might bring
Some prior knowledge that a 5th grader might bring dark, and next time it might be something worse, maybe a bear, and it wouldn’t be just quills in the leg, it would be worse. I can’t do this, he thought, again and again

  • What sparks look like

  • How it feels to be scared by an animal

  • How big porcupines are

  • To survive you have to have food, water and shelter

  • To survive you have to be strong


An actual retelling of key parts of chapter 8 from sam a 5th grade reader
An actual retelling of key parts of chapter 8 from Sam, a 5th grade reader

  • The same text for which we just examined the text base…


Why is this model of iteratively constructing and integrating so important
Why is this 5th grade reader model of iteratively constructing and integrating so important?

  • The mental (situation) model is central to knowledge construction

  • Building a mental model transforms new ideas and information into a form that can be added to memory, where they endure as knowledge that can be retrieved in the future. Unless readers build a mental model, the information they derive from the text is not likely to connect to their stored knowledge. The new information will be forgotten or lost.

  • Key role of knowledge:

    • Knowledge involved in even the most literal of processing

    • Knowledge begets comprehension begets knowledge…

    • Knowledge is available immediately: dynamic store…


How can we help students build solid text bases and rich and accurate situation models
How can we help students build solid text bases and rich and accurate situation models?

  • Do a good job of teaching subject matter in social studies, science, mathematics, and literature

  • Don’t let reading remain our curricular bully!


How can we help students build rich and accurate mental models
How can we help students build rich and accurate mental models?

  • Assist students in selecting appropriate knowledge frameworks to guide their construction process

  • Do everything possible to build as many connections as possible with other texts, experiences, knowledge domains

    • Do lots of “what does this remind you of?”

    • What is this like? How is it different from what it’s like?


How can we help students build rich and accurate mental models1
How can we help students build rich and accurate mental models?

  • A different model of guided reading

  • Stop every once in a while and give the kids a chance to construct/revise their current mental model

    • Research study:

      • interview protocol proved to be very “instructive”


Begin with very general probes before getting specific
Begin with very general probes before getting specific models?

  • So what’s going on in this part?

  • What do we know now that we didn’t know before?

  • What’s new?

  • What was the author trying to get us to understand here?

  • Well!…say something!


Invite and support clarifications of tricky parts
Invite and support clarifications of tricky parts models?

  • Anyone want to share something that was tricky or confusing?

  • How about this part here…where it says…?

  • I got confused by… What do you think about this part? What was the author trying to get us to think.


Follow up general probes and invitations for clarification with specific probes
Follow up general probes and invitations for clarification with specific probes.

  • So which of these things happened first? Why is that important?

  • In this paragraph, they use a lot of pronouns. Let’s check out our understanding of who or what they refer to..

  • Typical discussion questions are OK too--just to make sure are the tricky parts get clarified.

    • View questions as a scaffold for understanding the big picture not as a quiz.


The general model for guided reading
The general model for guided reading with specific probes.

  • A set for “stock-taking”

  • A set for using facts (details) in the service of concepts (main ideas)

  • More specific probes to scaffold the construction of the text base and situation model

  • Results in a pretty good summary of the selection--story, article, lab report, mathematical representation, etc.


Developing text bases and mental models
Developing Text Bases and Mental Models with specific probes.

  • Ensure that students have a full “tool” box (set of strategies) to haul out when things don’t just happen automatically…for

    • Connecting the known to the new

    • Connecting texts and parts of texts

    • Working toward coherence among potentially unconnected ideas

    • Recognizing and resolving ambiguities.


Monitoring for meaning
MONITORING FOR MEANING… with specific probes.

  • For a model of meaning to survive, it must

    • Be consistent with the current text base (square with the “facts of the case” thus far revealed)

    • Be consistent with the current knowledge base (square with what a reader knows to be true about the world)


The vulnerabilities
The Vulnerabilities with specific probes.

  • Clumsiness with motivation

    • A nod to interest and an assumption that readers are motivated

  • Gloss over critical reading

    • Assumes a liberal humanist “critical thinking” perspective, not a post-modern critical theoretical stance


Kintchian model1

Context with specific probes.

Kintchian Model

Text

3

Knowledge Base

Reader as Text User/Analyst/Critic

Does>>>>>>>>>

1

Text Base

2

Situation Model

Experience

Reader as Decoder

Says

Reader as Meaning Maker

Means

Out in the world

Inside the head


Prevailing research based wisdom about comprehension
Prevailing research-based wisdom about comprehension… with specific probes.

  • Kintsch’s Construction-Integration Model

  • Rand Report on Comprehension

Kintsch, W. (1998). Comprehension: A paradigm for cognition. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.

RAND Reading Study Group. (2002). Reading for understanding: Toward an R&D program in reading comprehension. Santa Monica, CA: RAND.


Rand with specific probes.


Kintsch s construction integration model
Kintsch’s Construction-Integration Model with specific probes.

  • As you read, for each unit, you

    • Construct a Textbase

    • Integrate the Text and Knowledge Base to create a Situation Model

    • Incorporate information from the Situation Model back into your knowledge base

    • Use your knowledge to nudge the world a bit.

    • Start all over again with the next bit of reading

    • C-I-C-I, anon anon

Says

Means

Does


My claim in 2010: The vision of comprehension in the with specific probes.TEKS or CCSS maps onto important theoretical, assessment, and curricular research

  • National Assessment of Educational Progress

  • Four Resources Model of Freebody and Luke

  • Kintsch’s Construction-Integration Model

http://www.scienceandliteracy.org/research/pdavidpearson


Key Ideas and Details with specific probes.

  • Read closely to determine what the text says explicitly and to make logical inferences from it; cite specific textual evidence when writing or speaking to support conclusions drawn from the text.

  • Determine central ideas or themes of a text and analyze their development; summarize the key supporting details and ideas.

  • Analyze how and why individuals, events, and ideas develop and interact over the course of a text.

    Craft and Structure

  • Interpret words and phrases as they are used in a text, including determining technical, connotative, and figurative meanings, and analyze how specific word choices shape meaning or tone.

  • Analyze the structure of texts, including how specific sentences, paragraphs, and larger portions of the text (e.g., a section, chapter, scene, or stanza) relate to each other and the whole.

  • Assess how point of view or purpose shapes the content and style of a text.

    Integration of Knowledge and Ideas

  • Integrate and evaluate content presented in diverse media and formats, including visually and quantitatively, as well as in words.*

  • Delineate and evaluate the argument and specific claims in a text, including the validity of the reasoning as well as the relevance and sufficiency of the evidence.

  • Analyze how two or more texts address similar themes or topics in order to build knowledge or to compare the approaches the authors take.


Common core
Common Core with specific probes.

  • Standards 1-3: Key ideas and details

  • Standards 4-6: Craft and structure

  • Standards 7-9: Integration of knowledge and ideas

http://www.scienceandliteracy.org/research/pdavidpearson


TEKS with specific probes.

  • Students analyze, make inferences and draw conclusions about XXX (insert type of text) and provide evidence from text to support their understanding.

    • ANALYZE (unpack the text base)

    • MAKE INFERENCES (build a situation model)

    • DRAW CONCLUSIONS (situate in the larger scheme of things—compare, evaluate, critique, use)

    • MAKE ARGUMENTS (use evidence to support all of the above)


NAEP with specific probes.

  • Locate and Recall

  • Interpret and Integrate

  • Critique and Evaluate


CCSS with specific probes.

NAEP

  • Key ideas and details

  • Craft and structure

  • Integration of knowledge and ideas

  • Locate and Recall

  • Interpret and Integrate

  • Critique and Evaluate

TEKS

  • Locate and Recall

  • Interpret and Integrate

  • Critique and Evaluate

  • ANALYZE

  • MAKE INFERENCES

  • DRAW CONCLUSIONS


Freebody and luke s 4 resources
Freebody and Luke’s 4 Resources with specific probes.

  • Reader as Decoder: Get the message:

  • Reader as Meaning Maker: Integrate with knowledge:

  • Reader as Text Analyst: What’s the real message and how is it crafted

  • Reader as Text Critic: What’s the subtext? The hidden (or not so hidden) agenda?

SAYS

MEANS

DOES


Consistent with cognitive views of reading
Consistent with Cognitive Views of Reading with specific probes.

Key Ideas and Details

Locate and Recall

What the text says

Analyze

Decoder

Infer

Integration of Knowledge and Ideas

Integrate and Interpret

Meaning Maker

What the text means

Craft and Structure

Conclude

What the text does

Critique and Evaluate

User/Analyst/Critic


For those who want to see everything at once
For those who want to see everything at once… with specific probes.

  • Pearson

  • Says

  • Means

  • Does


These consistencies provide
These consistencies provide… with specific probes.

  • Credibility

  • Stretch

  • Research “patina”

I was ready to go on the road to sell these standards to anyone who would listen



Why texas will not be immune from these pressures
Why Texas will not be immune from these pressures with specific probes.

  • Publishers will produce special materials for Texas

  • But they will bear a strong family resemblance to what they develop elsewhere

  • Close Reading and Text-based questions are everywhere


Text dependency of questions
Text dependency of questions with specific probes.

  • Regarding the nature of texts: “A significant percentage of tasks and questions are text dependent…Rigorous text-dependent questions require students to demonstrate that they not only can follow the details of what is explicitly stated but also are able to make valid claims that square with all the evidence in the text. Text-dependent questions do not require information or evidence from outside the text or texts; they establish what follows and what does not follow from the text itself.” (page 6)


Stay close to the text
Stay close to the text with specific probes.

  • Staying close to the text. “Materials make the text the focus of instruction by avoiding features that distract from the text. Teachers’ guides or students’ editions of curriculum materials should highlight the reading selections…Given the focus of the Common Core State Standards, publishers should be extremely sparing in offering activities that are not text based.”


My concern
My concern with specific probes.

  • We will operationally define text dependent as literal, factual questions

  • Forgetting that LOTS of other questions/tasks are also text-reliant

  • Compare

    • What were two reasons pioneers moved west?

    • What does the author believe about the causes of westward expansion in the United States?

    • How valid is the claim that author X writes from an ideology of manifest destiny?

  • YOU DON’T NEED A LITERAL FACTUAL QUESTION TO PROMOTE CLOSE READING…

  • Fundamental misunderstanding about reading theory:

    • Every action—critical, inferential, or literal—requires the use of prior knowledge to carry it out…

literal

intepretive

critical

I wonder why Coleman and Pimentel are so down on prior knowledge?


Text before all else
Text with specific probes.before all else

“The Common Core State Standards call for students to demonstrate a careful understanding of what they read beforeengaging their opinions, appraisals, or interpretations. Aligned materials should therefore require students to demonstrate that they have followed the details and logic of an author’s argument beforethey are asked to evaluate the thesis or compare the thesis to others.” (page 9)


My concern1
My concern with specific probes.

  • We will view literal comprehension as a prerequisite to inferential or critical comprehension.

  • Compare

    • We could read text X. Then read text Y. Then compare them on Z.

    • Or just ask them to conduct a comparative reading of X and Y on Z.

  • Sometimes the comparison or critique question better rationalizes the close reading


Close reading
Close reading with specific probes.

  • The Common Core State Standards place a high priority on the close, sustained reading of complex text, beginning with Reading Standard 1. Such reading emphasizes the particular over the general and strives to focus on what lies within the four corners of the text.


My concern2
My concern with specific probes.

  • Lots of things lie within the four corners of the text—some general and some specific. Writers use both all the time.

    • How long is something in the text? For the page, the folio, the chapter, the book?

    • Is there a point, say when you are on page 10, at which you can’t tell the difference between what you knew before you set eyes on the text and what you learned as you were reading page 3 of the text?

  • The text drags prior knowledge along even if you don’t want it to.

    • Schema Theory Tenet: Words INSTANTIATE schemata

      • Business had been slow since the oil crisis…

    • The text cries out for a schema to attach itself to.

    • Ideas that don’t connect don’t last long enough to allow learning (assimilation or accommodation) to occur

      • They drop out of memory pretty fast

      • In one eye and out the other!


Yet another role for knowledge monitoring
Yet another with specific probes.role for knowledge: Monitoring

  • How do we know that our understanding is good enough?

  • We use two standards…

    • Does it square with the textbase I have built thus far in today’s reading?

      • The last clause, sentence, paragraph, page, and more…

    • Does it square with what I know to be true about the world?


So what about prior knowledge
So what about with specific probes.Prior Knowledge

  • Why has it taken a beating in the Publishers’ Criteria

  • One thought: Too much Indulgence at the trough of prior knowledge

    • Too much Know, not enough Want to Learn and Learn

    • Too much picture walk

    • Too much story swapping about our experiences with roadrunners before reading…

  • Let’s right the wrongs

  • Need a mid course correction not a pendulum swing

    • Knowledge in proper perspective?

    • Balanced view of knowledge?

    • Knowledge in the service of understanding


But asking kids to hold their prior knowledge at bay
But asking kids to hold their prior knowledge at bay… with specific probes.

  • Is like

  • Asking dogs not to bark or

  • Leaves not to fall.

  • It’s in the nature of things

  • Dogs bark.

  • Leaves fall.

  • Readers use their prior knowledge to render text sensible and figure out what to retain for later.


So what s a body to do
So what’s a body to do? with specific probes.

  • Embrace the construct of close reading

    • But make sure that it applies to several purposes for reading

      • Reading to get the flow of ideas in the piece.

      • Reading to enhance our knowledge base!!!!

      • Reading to compare (with another text or body of experience or knowledge

      • Reading to critique

        • how good is the argument or the craft or

        • what is his bias/slant/perspective)

      • All of these approaches interrogate the text as an evidentiary base.

  • Embrace the virtuous cycle

    • Knowledge begets text comprehension begets knowledge…

This more comprehensive view of close reading is actually more consistent with historical precedents of close reading from the 1920s through the 1960s.


More a body can do
More a body can do… with specific probes.

  • For the CCSS, Stay closer to the standards than to the interpretations of the standards we have seen thus far.

  • For TEKS and CCRS, Keep on keeping on…

    • The model you have works just fine for balancing Text, Task, and Reader variables

  • A BIG TEXAS advantage is the way that you have sequenced the comprehension skills across grade levels

    • RECURRING cognitive moves instantiated in text that systematically increases in

      • Linguistic complexity AND

      • Conceptual complexity

  • Enact a full model of close reading

    • Four Resources works for me

    • Just make sure to encompass literal, interpretive, and critical reading tasks


My sure fire close reading strategy
My sure fire Close Reading Strategy with specific probes.

  • What do you think?

  • What makes you think so?

  • All about warranting claims about what the text says, means, or does...

  • From Mary Uboldi at Healdsburg High School


Use literacy tools to enhance the development of disciplinary knowledge and reasoning
Use Literacy Tools to Enhance the Development of Disciplinary Knowledge and Reasoning

  • Two views of integration

    • Integrated Language Arts

    • Integration between ELA and disciplines

  • The CCSS are better on the interdisciplinary than on the ELA integration

  • Corresponds to the actual uses to which reading and writing are put.

  • Reading, writing, and language always serve specific purposes

    • Reading and writing, not generically,

    • But about something in particular


The something in particular
The something in particular Disciplinary Knowledge and Reasoning

  • What reading, writing and language look like in a domain

  • The information for a particular topic or unit or chapter

  • The information in a particular text


Reading and writing are better when they are tools not goals
Reading and writing are better when they are tools not goals

  • If we don’t realign the current curricular imbalances, science and social studies may suffer…

  • but ultimately reading and writing will suffer

  • reading and writing are not about reading and writing in general

  • they are about reading and writing particular texts that are grounded in particular experiences

  • they both depend upon the existence, the acquisition and the utilization of knowledge (note the comprehension revolution!)

  • not knowledge in general but knowledge of particular disciplines, domains of inquiry, topics, patterns, concepts, and facts

  • In short, the very stuff of subject matter curriculum!

NY Times, Tuesday, March 28, 2006


Our current view of curriculum
Our current view of curriculum

Social Studies

Language Arts

Mathematics

Science


A model i like tools by disciplines
A model I like: Tools by Disciplines

Academic Disciplines………..

Language Tools


Early tools dominate
Early: Tools dominate

Academic Disciplines………..

Language Tools


Later disciplines dominate
Later: Disciplines dominate

Academic Disciplines………..

Language Tools


Weaving is even a better metaphor than a matrix
Weaving is even a better metaphor than a matrix

Language

Writing

Reading

math

literature

Social studies

Science


Reading

Writing

Language

Literature

Social Studies

Science

Mathematics


Integration is tough what happens when you try to integrate reading and math
Integration is tough…What happens when you try to integrate reading and math?

  • The evolution of mathematics story problems during the last 40 years.


1960 s
1960's integrate reading and math?

  • A peasant sells a bag of potatoes for $10. His costs amount to 4/5 of his selling price. What is his profit?


1970 s new math
1970's (New Math) integrate reading and math?

  • A farmer exchanges a set P of potatoes with a set M of money.

  • The cardinality of the set M is equal to $10 and each element of M is worth $1. Draw 10 big dots representing the elements of M.

  • The set C of production costs is comprised of 2 big dots less than the set M.

  • Represent C as a subset of M and give the answer to the question: What is the cardinality of the set of profits? (Draw everything in red).


1980 s
1980's integrate reading and math?

  • A farmer sells a bag of potatoes for $10. His production costs are $8 and his profit is $2. Underline the word "potatoes" and discuss with your classmates.


1990 s
1990's integrate reading and math?

  • A kapitalistpiggundjustleeakires $2 on a sak of patatos. Analiz this tekst and sertch for erors in speling, contens, grandmar and ponctuassion, and than ekspress your vioosregardeng this metid of getingritch.

    Author unknown


2000 s
2000's integrate reading and math?

  • Dan was a man.

  • Dan had a sack.

  • The sack was tan.

  • The sack had spuds

  • The spuds cost 8.

  • Dan got 10 for the tan sack of spuds.

  • How much can Dan the man have?


Shared responsibility for language and literacy development
Shared Responsibility for Language and Literacy Development integrate reading and math?

  • English and Subject Matter

  • Rand writing are always situated in a topic and a purpose.

  • Knowledge fuels comprehension and writing.

  • Reading and writing, along with experience and instruction, fuel knowledge.

  • Reading and writing and language work better when they are “tools” for the acquisition of

    • Knowledge

    • Insight

    • Joy


Influential piece for me
Influential Piece for me… integrate reading and math?

Teaching Disciplinary Literacy to Adolescents: Rethinking Content-Area Literacy Instruction. Timothy and Cynthia Shanahan, Harvard Ed Review, 2008, 78 (1).


Why sharing now
Why sharing now? integrate reading and math?

  • The gap for college and workplace readiness

  • The increasing demands of an informational society

  • Finally addressing a problem that has always been there

  • Increasing awareness among disciplinary scholars that they cannot cede disciplinary literacy to the English curriculum

    • April 23, 2010 edition of Science.


Just a word about text complexity
Just a word about text complexity integrate reading and math?

http://www.scienceandliteracy.org/research/pdavidpearson


How can we scaffold the reading of complex texts
How can we scaffold the reading of complex texts? integrate reading and math?

  • Read it for them? See IRA statement.

  • Gradually increase the demand in a program designed to up the ante when kids appear ready for it. Reading Plus or Oases

  • Reframe the problem:

    • not text complexity

    • but text access:

    • Answer: scaffolds:


Ira statement
IRA Statement integrate reading and math?

  • K-1: Read alouds

  • Beyond the beginning reading levels, the CCSS guidelines on text complexity encourage teachers to engage students in reading at least some texts they are likely to struggle with in terms of fluency and reading comprehension. This represents a major shift in instructional approach.

  • To ensure that the interactions with such texts lead to maximum student learning, teachers must provide significantly greater and more skillful instructional scaffolding

    • employing rereading, explanation, encouragement, and other supports within lessons.

  • To accomplish this shift successfully, teachers must have

    • access to appropriate instructional resources and

    • professional learning opportunities that support them in providing such scaffolding.


Scaffolds to cope with complexity
Scaffolds to cope with complexity integrate reading and math?

  • Discussion: Collaborative reasoning and problem solving.

    • This is where all we know about collaboration and social learning come into play

  • Vocabulary: Before, During, After

    • Inferring word meanings from context,

    • clarifying ambiguous or unknown words,

    • semantic mapping and any and all categorization activities


Scaffolds to cope with complexity1
Scaffolds to cope with complexity integrate reading and math?

  • Strategy Instruction

    • Strategies are the tools we invoke when our knowledge won’t do the comprehension for us.

    • They compensate for a lack of knowledge

    • Think about the TEKS comprehension standards as if they could be enacted in either an

      • Automatic mode

      • Strategic mode

    • Big issue: teach the standards strategically

  • Collaborative synthesis activities

    • Summarizing activities

    • Text maps

    • KWL charts


Resources i trust
Resources I trust… integrate reading and math?

  • Lucy Calkins. Pathways to the Common Core, Heinemann

  • Doug Fisher, Nancy Frey, and Diane Lapp

    • Text Complexity: Raising Rigor in Reading, IRA

    • Teaching Students to Read Like a Detective, Solution Tree

  • IRA’s website

  • S. Neuman and L. Gambrell (Eds.), Qualityreading instruction in the age of Common Core State Standards. Newark, DE: International Reading Association.

  • L. Morrow, T. Shanahan, & K. K. Wixson (Eds.), Teaching with the Common Core Standards for English Language Arts:  What Educators Need to Know,Grades PreK-2.  New York, NY:  Guilford Press.

  • https://www.teachingchannel.org/

  • Watch for work from the Literacy Design Collaborative work on discipline-based integrated ELA modules, 6-12.


Resources that i d sift through with a careful critical lens to find a few gems
Resources that I’d sift through with a careful, critical lens to find a few gems…

  • Engage NY (too much narrow close reading)

  • Edmodo NY (too much narrow close reading)

  • ASCD (like most, not all, of what I have seen)

  • https://www.teachingchannel.org/


Hopes for standards
Hopes for lens to find a few gems…standards…

  • I’m hangin’ in there for the near term.

  • They, both the CCSS and the combination of TEKS and CCRS are still the best games in town

  • They are moving in the right direction in terms of reading theory and research—deeper learning.

  • Hoping that CCSS and CCRS prove to be living documents

    • Regularly revised with advances in

      • our knowledge of reading

      • research on their “consequences”


So can the romance between scholarship and standards survive
So, can the romance between scholarship and standards survive?

  • Fleeting infatuation or long-term commitment?

  • Depends on two kinds of leadership

    • Leadership among the founders and authors of the standards to respond to feedback from the field

    • Leadership among those of us who implement the standards to

      • Speak truth to power

      • Make and share improvements

http://www.scienceandliteracy.org/research/pdavidpearson


ad